tv [untitled] March 12, 2012 10:00pm-10:30pm PDT
>> a meeting will come to order. good afternoon, everyone. this is the land use and economic development committee member of the -- meeting of the san francisco board of supervisors. before i ask for announcement, i wanted to thank the sfgtv staff for broadcasting us today. >> please make sure to silence all cell phones and electronic devices. >> thank you.
we have four items on the agenda. >> hearing on the interagency plan implementation committee annual progress report and the planning and development and, at -- impact fee report. >> kirsten dischinger. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i wanted to let you know that our team is part of the city wide group of the planning department. we are working on implementing the various area plans. there are a couple of pieces to
that. our group focuses on the infrastructure aside and the capital planning and to make sure the city's coordinating with growth when doing our infrastructure planning. i will be talking about a few of our reports about our progress without work. -- with that work. i want to talk about how we are implementing our plan and how we are using the enter agency plan. -- interagency plan. some of the key projects we are seeing move forward. this is an annual update. there are two reports that we provided for you. one talks about what the plans are for accenting the impact fees, updates on various capital projects that are coming from the area plan. there is also a report that was
developed by the controller. it is an accounting of funds collected, expended over the past year. on the back of the report, a small note on the annual inflation of the development impact fees. if you have any questions, please let me know. the planning department has a committee that focuses on thinking about how to move the infrastructure project forward. i want to talk about the rules and responsibilities of that committee. after that, what we will get into the different areas. as you can see on this map, there are quite a few planning projects that have been adopted. it focuses on the ones in green.
we recently adopted rezoning, which encourages and supports new residential and commercial development. just those four plan areas could accommodate over 18,000 new housing units and 10,000 new jobs over the next 20 years. our work is about making sure in the and the structure is built to support those new residents and employees. >> can you explain why you focus on those key areas and not candlestick, mission bay? >> we do focus on areas that have planning department initiated plans. some of the ones he listed are redevelopment areas and they have tax increment financing. that is a different funding mechanism, and that is up for discussion.
you probably know more about the plans for that than i do. we focus on pieces are around development impact fees. one western it is adopted, it will be folded into ipic's work. >> thank you. >> we resound all these areas, they have development impact fees to support the infrastructure. the development impact fees cover 30% of the total an infrastructure. supervisor cohen: in conjunction to what supervisor mar was asking, have there been conversations are around the financing for the redevelopment authority? district 10 with the exclusion
of the executive park, has a large area that you have designated as planned areas. what are other groups? >> the other groups refers to -- we want to be exclusive, wanted to -- i am not the most up-to-date in terms of the status of the changes of the redevelopment and how we will move forward with that. i should mention that one area that we will be coming back to you with next year is a development impact fee in that area. we will be taking a look at that. next year, we intend to come back with that included in our work. ok, great.
these are the areas that ipic is focusing on. these are the key tasks that came out of article 36 -- chapter 36. the ipic is focusing on three main areas. identifying projects. make sure that we are identifying all the projects and being smart about coordinating that work. also coordinating eastern neighborhoods to help prioritize the projects. we used impact the money to leverage other public money to secure grants. we work with project sponsors, private developers, to encourage them to build infrastructure projects that are consistent with the plan. the ipc's work on prioritizing
community improvement is based on the draft criteria we have before you. coordination was ongoing and is the most important. the impact fees cover only 30% of the plan's total need. as much as we can improve and enhance ongoing projects. for example, there is some impact feet projects that will follow, building on a large project. the group has been very successful in thinking strategically about opportunities like that. just to give you a rough sense of how much money we're talking about of the next five years, this is the total for the four areas. the ipic is coordinating with the city's overall two-year budgeting process. we are planning projects further out, up until the next five years.
you might know just looking at these, there are rather small numbers in the next two years. the number sort of jump up as far as projections. there are a lot of projects that we know about. we might be under construction in the next year or two, we are hoping. they will pay their fees that occupancy. -- at occupancy. >> $70 million over five years for these key project areas? how has the fee deferral program impacted these projects? >> some projects, when we know they are ready to be entitled, we have some information about when they will collect fees. these projections assume all project sponsors the for all their fees until occupancy.
we might see some of those projects move forward, we will not to the revenue until the end of their construction. on average, we estimate that to be two years. it depends on the scale of the project. we is a rule of thumb when we are doing our projections. these projections are based on projects that are in the department's pipeline. their projects that we are no our current planning staff has reviewed. -- we know our current planning staff has reviewed. they are just waiting for financing and a building permit approval. we budget for the first two years. the funds as we talk about in the first two years, 5.8 and 6.3, those funds are going to be in each agency's budget when they come before you during budget season. the other pieces will remain as a capital planning practice until next year. for each area, i want to spend a
little bit of time talking about what projects were selected. in the market octavia plant area there is a good transit project. some pedestrian improvements, and also some money to coordinate with the ongoing projects. >> which pedestrian improvements? >> we chose a strategy which was to identify a few key priorities, including 16th and market. to spend a little bit of money in the next year to design and further project implementation schedules. it is a total of $500,000 to be distributed among a few intersections. mta and planning will work with the community to figure out exactly how to -- >> which intersections are you referring to?
>> i can get that list for you. the other intersections work market and 14 -- >> that is in kind. >> this is just about the crosswalk. >> as someone who talks to a lot of people in the neighborhood, 16th and market is light years ahead of every other intersection in the upper market in terms of the need for pedestrian improvement. >> we have heard that pretty clearly. it is a matter of figuring out how to strategically use the $500,000 to leverage the other funds. >> i know there are other factors. i'm a big believer in concentrating resources to get
significant projects down instead of scattering them. for the folks who live in the city, when you can deliver a significant and tangible improvement, i think it increases the credibility of the department's, that we are getting significant projects done. that is one of the beautiful dance about the market plan. cable -- a beautiful thing about the market plan. i will get off of my soap box. >> i will spend a little bit more time on some of those projects. there are too large open space projects. i will talk about one of those a little -- there are two large open space projects. rincon hill, most of the
infrastructure projects are accomplished by in kind agreements. i will talk about more about what that means. in eastern neighborhoods, there are two key projects. a project that is very near and dear to my heart, the first impact fee funded project in market octavia. this project change as part of -- this is an idea that came out of the plan that is important to the community and was able to be implemented in coordinated -- in coordination with the mta. the community is very excited to see this move forward. even with the small amount of
funds, we were able to accomplish a project. these maps are a little bit small. i am talking about how we are spending impact the money, which is the map on your left. the map on your right shows other agency projects that are ongoing and really important. we have some traffic calming project south of market. that represents the full picture of the impact fee money. this shows you how much impact fee money of the total project cost is expected to go in there. you can see some of the intersection projects that we are talking about and upper market. there projected to be have funded by impact fees and have funded by some other public
resources. -- half-funded by some other public resources. on to some of the projects, we will start with the roncon hil l. this will be accomplished through an unkind agreement. public sponsors undergo a contract with the city to provide infrastructure in lieu of paying impact fees. this space was identified due out the community planning process. -- throughout the community planning process. they have been coordinating with developers to work out the details of the agreement. >> can you explain that process again? they do not pay the impact be? they worked out an agreement
with the infrastructure in this particular area? >> i do not know the exact cost, but let said the project sponsor of $1 million. they could either pay the city of million dollars to contribute towards the development, or in this case, they have chosen to sign an agreement to deliver the park itself out of -- at a value of the city on the project sponsor agree is a fair value for delivery of the park. at the end of the day, the city will own the parcel of land and will have access. if that makes sense, it is a another way to meet the obligation. the rincon hill park will be funded in part by an infrastructure finance district.
here is a more detailed view of the park itself. there is a community garden, a children's play area, and also some open space. in the eastern neighborhoods, there was priority projects identified throughout the planning process. the city is obliged to spend at least 80% of all of the impact fees on these projects. folsom street is one of those projects. it is recently designed and vetted. it is projected to cost over $53 million from a fit street to 11th street. -- 5th street to 11th street. the implementation of this product will be followed.
>> this is on folsom street from fifth straigeet to 11th street. >> that is correct. they're trying to figure out how to use the impact fee money appropriately. finally, a new park in the mission neighborhood. this park is 17th and folsom. it is one of the great stories of plan implementation. the planning department was able to secure a grant for this part that covers roughly half of the total cost. the total cost is about $5 million. the in impact fees will match that amount. there was a goal to create one new parks in each of the three neighborhoods. this is one step toward reaching that goal. most of the funds will be used for site acquisition. i believe the park is scheduled for construction in the next couple of years.
that is our short story of what is going on. if you guys have any questions, i am happy to answer them. thank you. >> colleagues, any questions? was adam going to present as well? it looks like the 17th and folsom park is a great example. a lot of these projects seem great with engaged neighbors and merchants and residents. thank you so much for the great report. let's continue this item, if there are no objections. is there anyone from the public who would like to speak? >> supervisors, dan murphy.
as a mayoral appointee on the eastern neighborhood cac and as a land-use professional, i want to make a simple point. it is a reminder of sorts. the impact fees in the original eastern neighborhood legislation, they are only program to cover 30% of the overall public need for infrastructure. i do not know what those metrics look like for market octavia. in the aftermath of the reselling, i was appointed as a member of the public -- i forget -- it was a working group to come up with some ideas on how we might fill the funding gap between what the projected need
is and what the projected sources of impact fees are. in the primary recommendation, and the structure finance district program, which staff mentioned is being used right now. i want that financing tool, which is really what it is, which relies on private development, to be on the supervisors radars. i find it interesting that there has not then -- it has not been applied in the eastern neighborhoods. it is characterized by large properties under single ownership. there is a fairly robust development pipeline there. from my point of view, it may be a missed opportunity that we are not moving forward aggressively to form in that specific location.
there are other areas as well that may be good candidates for that tool as well. i just wanted to share that. thank you. >> any other comments from the public? public comment is closed. >> item #2 -- ordinance, ending the san francisco planning code to extend the 90 days. supervisor cohen: this item before us today is a proposed extension to the eastern neighborhoods. as many of you know, the eastern neighborhoods plan was a long committee process based in the neighborhood planning that was focused on creating a zoning category and a place for blue-
collar manufacturing businesses. after a decade, the result of those planning process was the eastern neighborhoods plan, that included several new zoning categories, including pdr. only after three years, we have already seen remarkable success in the neighborhood with an increase in pdr activity. there is a demand for pdr space. these businesses are creating jobs in our city. the goal of the eastern neighborhoods plan was to create a balance between uses while protecting and encouraging mixed uses. included in the eastern neighborhoods plan was a three- year amnesty program to allow buildings with office use is not permitted under the plan to legitimize and pay the
applicable feet. at the request of an eastern neighborhoods citizens advisory committee, i introduced this ordinance to provide for an additional extension on the program to allow for additional notification of the legitimists -- legitimization deadline. after meeting with interested parties at a hearing, i am requesting that the fall in three amendments be made to this ordinance. to provide for a full six month extension of the program from the effective date of this ordinance. the amendment before you extends the program through october 31 of the share. however, i recently learned that we will not be having a land use committee meeting on march 19. because these amendments are substantive, this will need to sit an additional two weeks. i would like to extend the deadline to november 12, 2012,
to give potential applicants a full six months from when this ordinance is likely to be operative. at the request of the planning department, establishing a 90- day tagline -- and 90-day deadline. i would like to first call up anne marie rogers to talk about the legitimization processed. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor. as the supervisor has described the commission is grateful to revise the ordinance consistent with their unanimous recommendation. my presentation, i will give a little bit of the background, applicable fees, and the process for applicants. this area plan balances uses to
provide space for housing and the production, distribution, repair. the final plan was a compromise. as adopted by the board and commission, it did allow for an additional 10,000 dwelling units, but these units and the increased land for housing did come at a cost. this rezoning would cause a loss of 10,000 pdr jobs. we have seen these jobs continue to thrive and expand at a rate faster than other job growth in the city. according -- san francisco saw an increase of about 10% in these pdr jobs. the overall job rate only increased by about 2%. the plan was seeking to provide this balance. part of the balance was providing a means for this existing property owners of
nonconforming uses to legitimize their businesses. the benefits of this legitimization period iis that t provides the city with an opportunity where property owners who have been illegally operating could have an avenue to acquire the proper permits. this program also provides an exception to allow use this that would not otherwise be permitted. the city is seeking to ensure that in the future, office uses are located in the most appropriate areas. where there is infrastructure. under this program, property owners are paying large fees. there has been some misunderstanding about this. these fees are not only from the current eastern neighborhoods, there are also lower than what they would've had to pay if they were properly permitted at the time the established their uses.
property owners are being exempted from meeting the other code requirements. including parking, street trees, all of these requirements pre- existing at the eastern neighborhoods plants. we have 14 other projects legally pursue their entitlements. these projects. the required impact fees. the impact fees were developed -- the are established by calculating what the demand for public infrastructure would be as greeted by the project and insuring the project provides a fraction, but not all, of the public expense. the development will cause a public cost for schools, parks, libraries, and those who play by the rules pay those fees in full. let's review.